Microsoft .NET vs. J2EE: How Do They Stack Up?

As a side note, Microsoft claims that the default interpretive mode of Java is a liability, in that bytecodes designed for a virtual machine do not lend themselves as well to native optimization. I haven't seen any hard data to prove or disprove that claim, either generally (bytecodes vs. native-compiled languages) or specifically (Java vs. C#).

Several readers, in response to the call to include XML support in J2EE, mentioned the fact that J2EE 1.3 (currently in public draft) requires that any J2EE-compliant product must include Java XML SAX and DOM parsers. But this is just "bolting an XML SAX/DOM parser" to J2EE, as I mentioned. I was calling for it to be taken a step farther, to incorporate XML support directly in the J2EE support APIs. Ideally, J2EE-based components and services would have XML support (for messaging, interface description exports, etc.) automatically built-in, to some extent.

Corrections

Post your responses to this article here,or read what others have to say!

Jim Farley is a technology consultant, manager and author. His recent activites have included managing an eBusiness program for GE Research and Development , and heading up the engineering group at the Harvard Business School . He is the co-author of Java Enterprise in a Nutshell , and author of Java Distributed Computing , both published by O'Reilly.

Return to: java.oreilly.com